A thought for Christmas - not my own
No one knows the exact date of the birth of Jesus Christ. December 25 was selected by the Western Church only in the 4th century to rival the pre-Christian Roman feast of the Victorious Sun. Nor was Christ born in Year 1 as the era bearing his name continues to pretend. The New Testament locates the event shortly before the death of King Herod which occurred in 4BC. A 6th-century Roman monk, Dionysius the Small, is guilty of the miscalculation: he wrongly placed the birth of Jesus...
- Geza Vermes, author of The Authentic Gospel of Jesus
How important is historical accuracy for believers?
posted by Dream Debutante @ Saturday, December 25, 2004
2 Comments:
Historical accuracy would be important for me but not terribly so. I would put it down to inadequate means for research and the difficulties faced by those early scholars and translators.
What bothers me more (and has continued to do so since I was a child) is the portrayal of Jesus and the Holy Family as Scandinavians almost--blue eyes and blondes. It gladdened my heart that this year's Nobel Peace Prize winner Dr W Mathaai has questioned this picture. She says that Miachaelangelo was, by the stds of his time, taken up by the blue-blonde concept of beauty and we are are now stuck with it. The real picture should have been a swarthy complexion and black eyes, black hair and perhaps not too tall height.
I agree. The blue-blonde concept of beauty and the eurocentrism has
determined the representation of religious imagination and not only that. So
it´s important to point out how facts are. On the other hand as far as i
can remember from religion lessons at school it was part of it to speak
about the historical and geographical context in which jesus lived, so it
was never an issue to think as jesus as a "scandinavian". But seen in the
course of the centuries it would have had a huge impact to represent the
holy family as it was.
Post a Comment
<< Home